On 7/2/06, Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you want to review the mail thread that I started a while back, you'll see that it was a simple migration of code from ActiveMQ to Geronimo. I posted multiple times to garner support. Sadly, I think RTC is shifting Geronimo from being a meritocracy to being a bureaucracy. And only things get done if you have friends in the PMC. I've seen several folks say RTC "Has been as success", and while yes, it has increased communicatio, If you look back and try to compare what's been committed to SVN against what has passed in RTC with 3 PMC votes I'm sure you'll be hard pressed to find alot of examples of "success".
Since I previously was on the PMC due to starting Geronimo and actively work on it and getting it past the CTS testing, excuse me if I think I have all ready have shown this project that I'm a responsible community member. Unfortunately, I don't have 8 hours a day to devote to Geronimo anymore but I don't think that should be held against any PMCer.
I know you would never think something like this, but I could see how "spurring interest" could rapidly degenerate to hiring 3 PMC folks on consulting time.
I think RTC would be fine IF current implementation were slightly tweaked to only require: 3 1+ from committers saying, yeah I think that patch is a good idea. Notice the requirement for testing the patch is gone. The requirement or PMC member is gone. This would still generate all the discussion that we are seeing on the lists, but now you at least have CHANCE of moving forward with a change.
On 7/2/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whoa!
>
> I think we have been operation under a different assumption. I know I
> committed a patch when 1 got 3 committer +1s... And not even 1 PMC member
> looked at it. And that took over a week to garner enough votes. Imagine
> how long it would take if we had to get 3 PMC +1! I think we need to clear
> this up ASAP!
It's been cleared up for some time, imho. We can do two things to work
it out in a gentle manner:
1/ Be more active and describe the change so that not only are
developers encouraged to test it out or even PMCers. Why is it that
only committers and PMCers vote? Is the description of the change not
easy to understand enough? I wonder what makes them unattractive for
lurkers?
If you want to review the mail thread that I started a while back, you'll see that it was a simple migration of code from ActiveMQ to Geronimo. I posted multiple times to garner support. Sadly, I think RTC is shifting Geronimo from being a meritocracy to being a bureaucracy. And only things get done if you have friends in the PMC. I've seen several folks say RTC "Has been as success", and while yes, it has increased communicatio, If you look back and try to compare what's been committed to SVN against what has passed in RTC with 3 PMC votes I'm sure you'll be hard pressed to find alot of examples of "success".
2/ Be more active and gain a PMC nomination so the number of PMCers increases.
They seem to be obvious things, but in RTC mode we operate nothing's
as obvious as it was. We all learn RTC and with no other projects
Since I previously was on the PMC due to starting Geronimo and actively work on it and getting it past the CTS testing, excuse me if I think I have all ready have shown this project that I'm a responsible community member. Unfortunately, I don't have 8 hours a day to devote to Geronimo anymore but I don't think that should be held against any PMCer.
operating in RTC we're pioneers. With a limited bandwidth I've got I'm
quite certain I'll work on patches that are easy to grasp and have
extensive documentation behind them. Of course, the more talk about it
in the dev mailing list the better as it will spur my interest in
testing.
I know you would never think something like this, but I could see how "spurring interest" could rapidly degenerate to hiring 3 PMC folks on consulting time.
I think RTC would be fine IF current implementation were slightly tweaked to only require: 3 1+ from committers saying, yeah I think that patch is a good idea. Notice the requirement for testing the patch is gone. The requirement or PMC member is gone. This would still generate all the discussion that we are seeing on the lists, but now you at least have CHANCE of moving forward with a change.
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
